Accord Seen Helping Streamline Math, Science Programs

WASHINGTON--A recent agreement between the Education Department and
the National Science Foundation to pool resources to jointly plan and
develop precollegiate science and mathematics programs is more than a
mere formality, observers say.

Rather, they assert, the effort has the potential to streamline the
delivery of federal programs and to better define the federal
government's role in education.

At a joint press conference this month, Secretary of Education Lamar
Alexander and Walter E. Massey, the director of the N.S.F., signed a
"memorandum of understanding" designed to better target the $657
million in federal funds they administer toward helping the nation's
schoolchildren meet the ambitions national goals for science and math
education. ('See Education Week, Feb. 12, 1992.)

Under the terms of the agreement, the agencies, which together
account for 85 percent of federal spending on precollegiate education,
will establish a working group of 10 senior-level officials to set an
agenda for cooperation.

Officials said that the group's first priority will be to devise
ways to improve teacher-training programs.

Mr. Massey noted that the agreement is a "natural progression of
what has been a long history of interaction" between the N.S.F.--which
focuses on science research--and the Education Department-which
emphasizes defining and disseminating exemplary classroom
practices.

"We now have a formal mechanism for comprehensive planning at the
highest levels," he said.

Officials in the science-education community, while cautious about
pronouncing the agreement an unqualified success, said it has potential
for speeding reform.

"I think it is an extremely important step in the right direction,
but the proof will be in the pudding," said F. James Rutherford, the
education director of the American Association for the Advancement of
Science. "Now, it's up to the agencies to make the project work."

A Forum for Dialogue

Mr. Massey was quick to credit the Carnegie Commission on Science,
Technology, and Government for providing the impetus that led to the
agreement.

In a report titled "In the National Interest: The Federal Government
in the Reform of K-12 Math and Science Education," issued by the
commission last fall, a 14-member panel recommended that the agencies
should establish a joint office for math and science improvement. (See
Education Week, Sept. 18, 1991.)

"All of us should offer our thanks to the commission for providing
the inspiration for these negotiations," Mr. Massey said.

Lewis M. Branscomb, who headed the panel, said he was pleased that
the agencies acted so quickly, but not surprised at the relatively
short time, by Washington standards, it took to reach the agreement.
"Our task force was comprised of people with a lot of knowledge and
background," said Mr. Branscomb, the Albert Pratt Public Service
Professor of Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program at Harvard
University's Kennedy School of Government. "And, more importantly, it
was the right thing to do."

He noted that while preparing its report, the committee maintained a
strong working relationship with senior N.S.F officials.

He also suggested that the process may have been expedited by David
Kearns, the former chairman of the Xerox Corporation, who served as a
member of the committee before he resigned to accept an appointment as
deputy secretary of education.

Mr. Branscomb pointed out, however, that the agreement stops short
of fully implementing the panel's recommendation to create a joint
planning office.

"They didn't do everything we proposed, but they took the first
step," he said. "They've got to first talk to each other."

Defining a Federal Role

Officials of national science teaching organizations, while
unfamiliar with the details of the agreement, generally supported
efforts to reduce the duplication of effort at the federal level.

"On the surface, that looks very good," said Lynn Glass, the
president of the National Science Teachers Association.

The agreement may, for example, promote better articulation at the
local level between the Education Department's Eisenhower grants
program and the N.S.F.'S State Systemic Initiatives, he noted.

"The N.S.F. is connected very well with the scientific community,
but [it is] not well-connected with state [education] departments, and
it is not connected with the science and math education communities,"
he added.

Mr. Rutherford said that a unified approach at the federal level
might well balance the diversity of efforts to reform science
education.

"We put a lot of energy into reforms and we go in a lot directions,
but we do a lot of canceling out," he said.

He added that the new alliance may simplify accountability for
officials of Project 2061, the A.A.A.s.'s long-term effort to reform
science education, which is funded by and accountable to officials from
both agencies.

Mr. Branscomb noted that the importance of the agreement stems in
part from the fact that it implicitly recognizes the leverage that the
federal government can apply to reform.

"For most of the Reagan years, the big argument was 'Does the
federal government have a role at all?' "he noted.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.